From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: robert.jarzmik@free.fr (Robert Jarzmik) Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2017 22:21:39 +0200 Subject: [PATCH v3 02/12] ALSA: ac97: add an ac97 bus In-Reply-To: (Takashi Iwai's message of "Tue, 04 Jul 2017 22:10:28 +0200") References: <20170630194408.24978-1-robert.jarzmik@free.fr> <20170630194408.24978-3-robert.jarzmik@free.fr> <87bmp0t2lv.fsf@belgarion.home> Message-ID: <877ezmtz1o.fsf@belgarion.home> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Takashi Iwai writes: > On Tue, 04 Jul 2017 21:37:48 +0200, > Robert Jarzmik wrote: >> >> Takashi Iwai writes: >> >> > On Fri, 30 Jun 2017 21:43:58 +0200, >> > Robert Jarzmik wrote: >> >> +static struct bus_type ac97_bus_type = { >> >> + .name = "ac97", >> > >> > Name-conflict with the old ac97 bus? >> Yeah, fair point. So what should I choose for this new one ? >> - ac97new >> - ac97bis >> - ac97_2 >> - ac97reborn > > ac97bus > ac97_episode_5 > ac98 > ... > > I have no opinion on it. Ah clone wars one is really tempting :) But let's have ac97bus actually. > You can use subsys_init() for modules, it's no problem. > When it's built for a module, all xxx_init() is handled as equivalent > with module_init(). See linux/module.h. > > It's just the lack of module_exit() in your case. Got it, I'll add it for v4. Cheers. -- Robert